Although the current eco-labeling system is already achieving positive environmental effects, a new study showed that a basic change in the system could make it even more efficient. So far, eco-labels have always been expressed in a positive way: they emphasize that marketed products are better than other similar products with regard to environmental impact. Since this method of labeling only convinces individuals who already had a strong interest in ecological issues to buy eco-labeled alternatives, it might be a good idea to introduce a labeling system containing also neutral or negative labels. Products with a negative label would indicate negative environmental outcomes and would –contrary to the positive labeling strategy- be able to persuade both people who feel a strong commitment towards the environment and people with only an intermediate interest in environmental issues. But because eco-labeling implies an extra cost for the producers, and no producer would voluntarily pay for their products to be negatively labeled, a regulation that requires a label for every single product should be established.
(source)
Famke De Ro
I don’t completely agree with the statement that there should be neutral or negative labels. Firstly, like you already mentioned, there would be an extra cost for the producers. Secondly if such labels existed, no one would want to put a negative-labeled product in his/her shopping cart. This means that these negative-labeled products wouldn’t be bought anymore and subsequently would disappear out of the market. I reckon that if this were to happen, people wouldn’t have a choice between different products anymore. The last reason is that a huge discussion will arise about how products like oil, electricity, pesticides, etc. should be labeled. Because although we need them, these products will never be environmentally friendly.
BeantwoordenVerwijderenSo, according to me, the study has to take into account all possible consequences of such labels before drawing conclusions about the efficiency of such a labeling system.
Ellen De Medts
I would like to react on some counterarguments you mentioned. First of all, I don't think negative labels would reduce the product range dramatically. Only products that are very polluting would disappear, which is not at all a bad thing for the environment. Furthermore I am convinced that all producers will do the best they can to receive a neutral or positive label and therefore will search for production methods that are as environmentally friendly as possible.
BeantwoordenVerwijderenBut you do have a point when you say it will be difficult to label products like oil, electricity, pesticides, etc. Maybe it could be a solution to give positive labels to producers who can prove that they have done some serious efforts to reduce pollution, even if their products will never be completely environmentally friendly.
Famke De Ro